Merit Pay: Is it now time to pull back high stakes testing along with ‘Merit Pay’ as a reward?

Dr. Hans Andrews

This is a multi-part article. This is part 1 further installments will be in upcoming issues.

Introduction

The United States educational system, along with those in numerous other countries, has been moved into what is called a ‘high stakes’ testing program emphasis across these countries. This emphasis on testing, to show that testing scores for individuals and schools can be improved, has been found to produce mixed results and has shifted some of the school curriculum away from previously broader curriculum for students into a much greater emphasis on test preparation and testing. A main incentive brought into the testing movement has been the offering of ‘merit pay’ for those teachers who are able to produce improved student testing scores. This incentive can now be seen as source of conflict between school systems and their teachers and between teachers. School atmosphere of cooperation and assistance between teachers has been greatly strained.

There are now mixed but fairly negative results from the high stakes testing program being revealed in recent national reviews of testing and the outcomes achieved. There has been the embarrassment in public identification stories reported of cheating within schools and states as a result of the pressure to show improved student scores. In addition, the improved systems of teacher evaluation, recruitment of higher quality teachers, and removal of poor and incompetent teachers all have shown disappointing results at very high financial costs.

The role of merit pay has also not lived up to the promises made. It has been found not producing the increased student test outcomes in numerous areas where it had been initiated.

This article presents an overall look at each of these above pieces in the ‘high stakes’ testing programs that have been taking place in recent years. Some historical results of merit pay are also highlighted to show concerns and problems with merit pay over the past 45+ years.

Merit pay and recognition defined

The National School Board Association (NSBA) provided the following definitions of merit pay and recognition (1987):

• Merit Pay. Merit pay programs link teachers’ salaries to periodic assessments of their performance. Financial bonuses are awarded to the teachers who receive the highest ratings.

Association of Elementary School Principals (Million, 2004), several important things came to the forefront relative to the recognition they had received:

• It boosted self-esteem.

• It renewed confidence in their teaching and reinforced what they had been doing.

• Payment by Results. Merit pay programs that base individual teacher bonuses on their students’ test scores gains.

• It gave them a voice in their profession

The non-monetary incentive programs defined by the NSBA included:

Teacher Recognition Programs. These are programs that provide public recognition for outstanding teachers. The Teacher-of-the-Year program is one of the well-known programs.

Recognition Rewards could include purchase of additional classroom equipment or attendance at professional conferences, a supper with the governing board, a plaque, public information releases on these teachers being recognised, etc (pp 95-97)

The alternative of ‘recognition’

In a survey of All-USA winners by the National

‘More than anything,’ one teacher said, ‘the award just reinforced what we have known all along We are doing the right thing for kids’ (p.1).

Harris Interactive (1999) found ‘recognition’ was one of the three top drivers of satisfaction. The research came from the Gordon S. Black Corporation (GSBC) that also found that found in a survey of 23,569 teachers that approximately 50 percent had no form of teacher recognition in their schools.

by Dr Cathy Coker